Archive for the 'Ethics' Category

Activists and companies can co-operate

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on June 10, 2008
in Environmental Issues, Ethics, Future Trends and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

The Economist recently ran a fascinating little piece on how activists and companies need to work towards a common outcome and goal. Read it here (subscription may be required) - or an extract below. It may be idealistic, but it is a wonderful goal to have, and certainly is a requirement if we are really going to change the world.

Strange bedfellows

Companies as activists
May 22nd 2008

LAST month Tom Katzenmeyer, vice-president of investor relations at Limited Brands, met representatives of the government of the Canadian province of Alberta. Limited Brands is an American apparel firm with sales of $10.1 billion last year; its best-known division is Victoria’s Secret, which sells lingerie. And what was the topic of discussion? The firm’s worries over threatened caribou habitats.

Continue reading ‘Activists and companies can co-operate’

Good with Money

Published
by
Dean van Leeuwen
on June 4, 2008
in Connection Economy, Environmental Issues, Ethics and Marketing and sales
. 0 Comments

Our global research has long been indicating that companies who concentrate more on who they are and less on what they sell will gain the competitive edge over their competitors.

The “who you are” is defined by the values a company lives by and how effectively the company’s values connect with the talent staff that work for them and the valuable customers that continue to shop with them.

One of the values that companies need to be demonstrating today is that of being ethically conscious. And this means more than just changing to efficient green light bulbs! It means living by the value…making business decisions, both strategic and operational, against the value even if it hurts the bottom line.

I came across a company that is doing great stuff in this sphere. Have a look at their marketing campaign The Co-Operative Bank is really promoting who they are and what they stand for, and most importantly their claims are back by some substantial meaningful and significant claims. They have turned down over £700m in revenue based on ethical decisions… now that is putting your money where your mouth is and living by the values they subscribe to. Impressive!!!

I’ll be reviewing this campaign and the company’s operations over the next few weeks and trying to find out more about their results, but I’ll stick my neck out here and make a prediction that their values based campaign is having a fantastic response from the Millennial, Gen X and Boomer generations, a unique achievement.

Olympics, controversy and you

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on April 8, 2008
in Environmental Issues, Ethics, Future Trends, Global View and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

The Olympic torch has left Athens, Greece on its traditional torch run around the world until it eventually arrives at the Beijing Olympic stadium during the opening ceremony. Right from the first day, it has been met with something that the Chinese officials did not anticipate: protestors. In an unprecendented move, the torch was actually extinguished in Paris so that it could be loaded onto a bus and rushed away from growing violence amongst the protestors. TV news scenes from London, Paris and San Francisco show police beating protestors, dragging them into prison vans and frog marching them away - none of these are scenes that add to the Olympic brand and mythos.

This is becoming a major news story - a BAD news story. It’s China Inc that’s on the receiving end. But it could be you and your company next. We have been saying for some time now that there is a new generation of young people and global citizens that are going to rise up and become activist customers and ethical consumers. This Olympics needs to be YOUR company’s wake up call that this can happen anytime, anywhere. You have been warned - get your act together, and ensure that all the skeletons in your closet are well sorted out!

Personal Ethics in the Corporate World

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on November 25, 2007
in Ethics
. 0 Comments

EthicsHow do you confront the moral tensions inherent in corporate life and come out with your ethics intact? Elizabeth Doty writes for S+B (Strategy and Business), and has written an excellent articles on the topic, followed up by an online forum discussion and an extended Q&A article. Read these excellent articles here:

I think you need to register to read them, but it’s free and there are some brilliant articles at the site.

The world’s worst products

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on November 3, 2007
in Ethics, Media tidbits and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

The world’s worst products, as voted for by Consumers International.

  • Coca-Cola – for continuing the international marketing of its bottled water, Dasani, despite admitting it comes from the same sources as local tap water.
  • Kellogg’s – for the worldwide use of cartoon-type characters and product tie-ins aimed at children, despite high levels of sugar and salt in their food products.
  • Mattel – for stonewalling US congressional investigations and avoiding overall responsibility for the global recall of 21 million products.
  • With the overall prize going to: Takeda Pharmaceuticals – for taking advantage of poor US regulation and advertising sleeping pills to children, despite health warnings about pediatric use.

Richard Lloyd, Director General of Consumers International, said:

“These multi-billion dollar companies are global brands with a responsibility to be honest, accountable and responsible. In highlighting their short-comings Consumers International and its 220 member organisations are holding corporations to account and demanding businesses take social responsibility seriously.”

See a newspaper report with some details and commentary here.

Why Ethical Consumption is Taking Off

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on October 16, 2007
in Articles, Environmental Issues and Ethics
. 1 Comment

Dr Graeme Codrington’s latest presentation is called “Hannah’s Rules” which alerts companies to an essential emerging trend: the ethical consumer. In this article, he explains WHY ethical consumption is such a growing trend.

Why Ethical Consumption is Taking Off

By Dr Graeme Codrington

Today’s consumers are not just looking for a good product at a fair price. They are looking beyond the product or service to the ethics of the company that supplies it. The symptoms of this shift in focus by consumers is evident in the concerns that these customers have about the companies they purchase from. There is growing interest, for example, in labour practices, diversity quotas, environmental policies, social responsibility, and even CEO salaries are under scrutiny.

So-called “triple bottom line� reporting, which gets companies to present not just financial results, but also social and environmental results and impact, too, is one way in which corporates are trying to respond. And they need to respond because are voicing their concerns, in everything from boycotting stores to suing corporations. Companies like Ford, Gap, Nike, Walmart and KfC have all experienced the wrath of ethical consumers in recent years, and have been forced to respond quickly to protect their reputations and their very existence as companies.

This growing emphasis on ethical consumption is a trend that cannot be ignored. It is not going to go away. There are some important changes in the world that provide indications that ethical consumers will continue to be a growing force in the next few decades. Companies would do well to understand this trend, and be proactive in dealing with it.

Continue reading ‘Why Ethical Consumption is Taking Off’

Home Depot pays out big time - for what?

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on August 10, 2007
in Ethics
. 1 Comment

This isn’t new news, but as I was doing research into Executive pay packages, I picked up this info from earlier this year.

On 3 January 2007, Bob Nardelli (once in line for GE top spot) left Home Depot, where he had been CEO for 6 years. Just four months earlier he had said (to AP) he would not consider leaving the company. During his years, there was a 6% drop in share price, during the time of a fairly rampant market, and the steady increase in competitor’s shares (especially Lowe’s). To be fair there was a massive drop after he joined, and the last 4 years have seen a slow and steady climb, but nevertheless, he has underperformed against the market. Home Depot, which has 345,000 staff and is second only to Wal-Mart among US shopping chains, and the world’s largest DIY store.

Nardelli had come under fire for his massive pay package (he earned $228m in his 6 years) while at Home Depot, especially since the last set of results he had presented were anything but spectacular. He had infuriated shareholders in May 2006 by refusing to take any questions during the company’s annual meeting - at which he was the only board member to turn up. He had angered unions, who were scathing about him - one sent activists dressed as chickens to Home Depot’s annual meeting to highlight the board’s lack of accountability.

But, amazingly, on leaving the company he received a $210 million compensation package that includes $20 million in cash severance and $32 million in retirement benefits. Nardelli has agreed not to compete with the company for one year, not to solicit employees or customers of Home Depot for four years, and other conditions - if he complies he could be entitled to a further $18m or so. (Although, as one blogger points out, surely with his record, you would want him to go to a competitor).

CO2 Neutral products are becoming “fashionable” but are new product launches enough to target the “ethical consumer”?

Published
by
Dean van Leeuwen
on August 6, 2007
in Environmental Issues, Ethics, Future Trends, Generations and Marketing and sales
. 0 Comments

ibuyeco, a new eco-friendly car insurance scheme that offsets 100% of customers’ CO2 emissions for the duration of their policy, was launched in the UK at the end of April 2007. The company has just started a strong above the line advertising, including television and other national media.

Created by the Budget Group, one of the UK’s leading insurance intermediaries, ibuyeco is one of the first car insurance products to offset 100% of a car’s carbon emissions. Customers pay an additional amount to their premiums. Payments are calculated on the type of vehicle and the estimated mileage, details provided by customers. Using this method, the typical family car travelling a mileage of between 10,000 and 12,000 would require an offset fee of roughly £20, for example. ibuyeco buy carbon credits through The Carbon Neutral Company who in return puts the money towards projects that reduce carbon emissions. These projects fall into different categories including: increased energy efficiency, forestry projects and renewable energy, and are based in both the UK and overseas.

The launch of ibuyeco is the result of a social trend that TomorrowToday has been researching for sometime and which we are calling the “rise of the ethical consumer�.

In November 2006 Barclays announced the first carbon neutral debit card and we’re expecting a large number of companies to follow ibuyeco and Barclays. The important issue though is, are these companies jumping onto the global warming marketing bandwagon or does carbon reduction form part of the company’s values and long term strategy? Another question is why did Budget need to launch a new company and why doesn’t it position the Budget brand as an ethical brand? Hiding behind a new brand for marketing reasons will not pay dividends unless the company itself changes.

When it comes to targeting the “ethical consumer�, made largely out of Generation Y, companies had best practice what they preach. If they don’t, this generation who is highly connected via the web will spread the word and ruthlessly weed out the pretenders.

Companies need to do more than launch new products and advertising campaigns professing to support initiatives that reduce global warming. Companies need to be taking steps towards reducing their own carbon emissions and communicating their efforts, in carbon friendly ways! Carbon reductions need to be part of the company’s day-to-day strategies and way of work. It has to become integrated into the company’s culture and demonstrated in a number of ways, from the way they employ recruits to how they run their meetings and sell their products. There is no point a company asking consumers to buy its product so that they, the consumer can contribute to carbon emissions, when the company itself is contributing to carbon emissions by making clients fill out massive application forms and accept loads of marketing mailings.

Our advice to companies thinking about targeting customers using carbon reduction schemes, is to first integrate carbon reductions into the fabric of their company’s culture before they launch new products. The new ethical consumer will buy from your company because of who you are (your company’s values) and not because of what you sell.

Beware the Rise of the Ethical Consumer

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on July 26, 2007
in Articles, Environmental Issues, Ethics and Millennial generation
. 4 Comments

A new generation of “ethical consumers” are starting to demand more than just great products and services at fair prices - they also increasingly require transparency, environmental care, social responsibility, diversity and a host of other characteristics in the companies they buy from. They will be demanding these from their employers in the future, too. In this article, Dr Graeme Codrington helps you to see your company - your product offerings, your brand, your reputation, your leaders, your people and your future - through the eyes of your future consumers and staff.

Continue reading ‘Beware the Rise of the Ethical Consumer’

Some wisdom from Warren Buffett

Published
by
Barrie Bramley
on July 24, 2007
in Ethics, Generations, Knowledge Continuity and Work-Life Integration (and wellness)
. 0 Comments

I received this in an e-mail today….

There was a one hour interview on CNBC with Warren Buffett, the second richest man who has donated $31 billion to charity Here are some very
interesting aspects of his life:

  1. He bought his first share at age 11 and he now regrets that he started too late!
  2. He bought a small farm at age 14 with savings from delivering newspapers.
  3. He still lives in the same small 3-bedroom house in mid-town Omaha, that he bought after he got married 50 years ago. He says that he has everything he needs in that house. His house does not have a wall or a fence.
  4. He drives his own car everywhere and does not have a driver or security people around him.
  5. He never travels by private jet, although he owns the world’s largest private jet company.
  6. His company, Berkshire Hathaway, owns 63 companies. He writes only one letter each year to the CEOs of these companies, giving them goals  for the year. He never holds meetings or calls them on a regular basis.  He has given his CEO’s only two rules. Rule number 1: do not lose any of your share holder’s money. Rule number 2: Do not forget rule number 1.
  7. He does not socialize with the high society crowd. His past time after he gets home is to make himself some pop corn and watch Television.
  8. Bill Gates, the world’s richest man met him for the first time only 5 years ago. Bill Gates did not think he had anything in common with Warren Buffet. So he had scheduled his meeting only for half hour. But when Gates met him, the meeting lasted for ten hours and Bill Gates became a devotee of Warren Buffett.
  9. Warren Buffett does not carry a cell phone, nor has a computer on his desk.

 
His advice to young people: “Stay away from credit cards and invest in yourself and Remember:

  A.  Money doesn’t create man but it is the man who created money.
  B.  Live your life as simple as you are.
  C.  Don’t do what others say, just listen to them, but do what you feel is good.
  D.  Don’t go on brand name; just wear those things in which u feel  comfortable.
  E.  Don’t waste your money on unnecessary things; just spend on them  who are really in need rather.
  F.  After all it’s your life then why give chance to others to rule our  life.”

Powered by ScribeFire.

URTrmn8d - Sacking employees by text message

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on July 12, 2007
in Ethics, Technology and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

Here’s an old story that I just picked up. Mainly from the humour list, Top5. See below for the funny side of this.

Text messageOver 2,500 people learned they’d lost their jobs when the British Amulet Group fired them by sending a text message to their cell phones. This happened in 2003 - read about it here. A similar incident occured in 2006. Read about it here.

At one stage I would have written, “you can’t believe that companies would be that stupid”. But I have been consulting to companies long enough to know that that isn’t true. Companies can indeed be very, very stupid.

So, if you were to send a text message to fire staff, what would you say? Here is what the crazy guys at Top 5 suggested:
Continue reading ‘URTrmn8d - Sacking employees by text message’

Exploring business’s social contract: An interview with Daniel Yankelovich

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on June 17, 2007
in Connection Economy, Ethics, Leadership and Organisational Design
. 1 Comment

A founding father of public-opinion research explains why shareholder value isn’t enough.

I found this in my archives recently. It is dated 2007, and comes from the McKinsey Quaterly. I have no idea how I got it. It is an excellent read, and supports much of what we do at TomorrowToday. Enjoy!

As a founding father of public-opinion research and its preeminent practitioner, Daniel Yankelovich has been probing attitudes toward business and other issues for more than four decades. Yankelovich, 82, introduced the New York Times/Yankelovich poll in 1975, has written 11 books, and served as a consultant to business and political leaders. He has also established four companies, including his latest, Viewpoint Learning, which helps organizations to develop special-purpose dialogues to expand their options, anticipate obstacles, and broaden support for difficult decisions. Yankelovich is no stranger to the boardrooms of large enterprises, having served as a director of Arkla, CBS, Educational Testing Service, Meredith, U S West, and other companies, as well as foundations, universities, and nonprofits.

Throughout his career Yankelovich has unwaveringly stressed the need for organizations to embrace ethical integrity in their operations and their ties to the outside world. He recently sat down at his home in La Jolla, California, with Lenny Mendonca, a director in McKinseys San Francisco office, and Matt Miller, an adviser to McKinsey, to discuss the current and future contract between business and society.

The Quarterly: What does your research show about businesss standing with society today?
Daniel Yankelovich: The social contract with business is in a state of flux. Milton Friedman has had an enormous influence on the outlook of US business, especially his interpretation of Adam Smiths concept of the invisible hand, which argues against a corporations broader engagement with society. Friedmans view is that social good comes about automatically when companies make a profit. So its a narrow adherence to the bottom line.
But McKinseys own research is in complete agreement with the idea that you need a broader engagement.HYPERLINK “1 And thats where we are now moving. Friedmans influence and the ideology of shareholder value reinforce each other and cater to only one constituencyshareholders. Now there is growing agreement that the engagement has to be broader and that profitability doesnt always automatically enhance the public good. In other words, a more pragmatic approach.

Continue reading ‘Exploring business’s social contract: An interview with Daniel Yankelovich’

Wikipedia: Are you who you say you are?

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on March 14, 2007
in Connection Economy and Ethics
. 3 Comments

A few days ago, a senior Wikipedia editor was “outed”. Essjay, as he was known, had claimed to be a professor of religious studies. In fact, his name is Ryan Jordan, and he is a 24-year-old college drop-out. An interesting question arises about how Wikipedia works and about the information it makes available. Ryan, although not who he claimed to be, was actually a pretty good editor, by all accounts, and did a great job of fixing up entries and applying the stringent Wikipedia encyclopedia rules for content, style, format, referencing, etc.

Wikipedia allows for anonymity, and, in fact, almost every one of its editors uses a pseudonym - in fact, their identities are jealously guarded. This assists in making sure that any editing decisions are dealt with (more) objectively than they might be, if there was potential for personal appeals. The anonymity creates a phoney equality, putting everyone on equal level. I wonder if this incident will change how Wikipedia works, with some Big Brother top-level/behind-the-scenes vetting of (at least) the editors? I doubt it. In this connected world, people are judged more on their outputs (the value of the job they did) than their qualifications or inputs. But, the fact that Ryan lied and therefore displayed a lack of integrity should raise some concerns. Given how Wikipedia operates, one wonders why he felt the need to do that in the first place.

Some interesting ethical issues await…

As an aside, the fact that at least one editor is very much NOT who he claimed to be is worrying. And a little disturbing for people (like me) who have had entries removed from Wikipedia for spurious (IMO) reasons.

Buffett on Bosses

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on March 11, 2007
in Ethics, General and Global View
. 0 Comments

Every year at about this time, Warren Buffett, the world’s most legendary (and richest) investor, makes his annual letter to shareholders public. As always, the 2007 letter is a good read (its labelled “2006″ because its a report about last year). Now that he knows how many people read the letter (and without any competition it is the most read page of Annual Financial Statements anywhere in the world), his letters have taken on a slightly more self-aware tone (read the full archives from 1977 here).

As always, this year, his thoughts range quite widely. A few parts caught my attention:

Continue reading ‘Buffett on Bosses’

Religion and marketing

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on March 2, 2007
in Ethics and Future Trends
. 0 Comments

One of the major trends we have been tracking for some time is the rise in the influence of religious beliefs as a driver of people’s values and behaviour. A MarketingWeb article on the issue (extracted from Nilewide) puts it succinctly and clearly. This is an issue marketers need to take seriously.

Read this interesting insight below, or at MarketingWeb here.
Continue reading ‘Religion and marketing’

How Rich Are You?

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on February 23, 2007
in Ethics, General and Global View
. 0 Comments

How rich are you? How do you stack up with the other 6 billion inhabitants of the planet?

Now, you can find out exactly, and you will be amazed. If you can read this blog entry, then you’re rich. Seriously, you are.

Check it out at: http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Cost cutting for competitiveness - really? What about executive pay!

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on February 20, 2007
in Ethics and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 4 Comments

In yesterday’s Star newspaper’s Business Report, there was an article on how Beacon, a sweet making division of Tiger Brands, had had to face up to stiff Brazilian competition. For example, by shaving just 1mm off each sweet’s wrapper, they had saved R 3 million in the last financial year. In addition to a continuous improvement programme, Beacon have been helped by increased import duties on their competitors.

This is a good news story for the South African manufacturer, but it got me thinking about what’s going on behind the scenes at companies that need to slash costs to be internationally competitive. So, I went digging. I am sure its not a conspiracy, but at Tiger’s annual results website, the link to their Executive remuneration summary is not working (its the only non functional link on the page). The only way to get at this info is to download the PDF of the entire financials, and wade through to page 73 to get a 6 page explanation of Executive pay principles, followed on page 79 by the chart of actual pay and bonuses. In line with strict accounting standards, share options are NOT accounted for or listed. You have to go elsewhere to get estimates of this information.

Continue reading ‘Cost cutting for competitiveness - really? What about executive pay!’

Cutting Costs reaches its event horizon

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on January 28, 2007
in Environmental Issues, Ethics and Innovation
. 3 Comments

A nice article in the Economist, 18 Jan 07, entitled: “Browne out“, looks at the departure of BP’s boss, Lord (John) Browne. He has been in charge since 1995, and his tenure coincides with some huge changes in the industry. These include massive mergers, the “greening” of Big Oil, and at the same time some big mess ups - “In March 2005 a fire at an American refinery killed 15 people and injured 170 more. Since then, BP has suffered corrosion and spills on its pipelines in Alaska, delays in developing new oilfields and two investigations of its trading arm for price-rigging.”

But the article makes a very interesting point: most of these issues relate to massive cost cutting that has characterised the oil industry in the past decade. Ruthlessly cutting costs eventually strips out the ability of a company to do what it has to do. It stretches staff, and demoralises them as well, often beyond their ability to cope with situations that arise. In oil companies, as in other industries, this can have catastrophic results, in the glare of public scrutiny. But for other companies, especially in the service industries and professional firms, the results can be equally catastrophic - yet unseen until the company teeters and topples.

There are only so many costs you cut, until you and all your competitors are all running on empty. In most industries, we’ve reached that point. Now, I predict, we’ll see competitive advantage coming in the form of “we’re not the cheapest, but we are the best” type approaches, as companies rebuild strategic capacity, and focus on VALUE, not just COSTS.

WH Smith closes pension fund

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on January 10, 2007
in Ethics, Future Trends, Generations and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

Today, it was announced that WH Smith, the UK retailer, would close its company pension fund and restrict it only to existing members. This would mean that over the next few years, the pension fund would decline and eventually die out as current employees use it up.

This is an example of exactly what we have been predicting for a number of years, as Gen Xers hit the workplace in force. Companies will cite increasing costs, but the effect will be that Gen Xer workers will be excluded. At one level, this is not a problem as most Gen Xers would prefer to look after their own retirement planning anyway. But it will breed further divides between young and old in the workforce, and reinforce the lack of loyalty (if you don’t look after me, why should I look after you?) attitude of today’s young talent.

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World

Published
by
Barrie Bramley
on January 5, 2007
in Book Reviews, Ethics and Future Trends
. 1 Comment

Just before going on leave I picked up a couple of books to read while I was away. I’ve never read a ‘Noam Chomsky‘ (apparently he’s one of those must read human beings before you die) and found this one, “Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World“. I chose it because it’s written in conversation style (interview by David Barsamian) around issues pertaining to the US imperial ambitions for the rest of us.

“I think not only the region (Middle East) but the world in general correctly perceives the U.S. invasion as a test case, an effort to establish a new norm for the use of military force.”

It felt like it could be an easy ’slide’ into Noam, and it was. What surprised me was that it didn’t turn out to be a monster, thud-factor, academic read that I was going to have to work hard at getting my mind around. It turned out to be a straight forward, in your face, heck of an interesting read. He, in fact, spoke regularly of academics and I enjoyed his abuse of them and their role in making things more complicated than they should be.

If you’re looking for an easy to read overview of Noam Chomsky’s view of the world post-911, and haven’t read anything of his before, then I’d recommend this as a good starting place.

His book left me with a few paradoxical thoughts. One being that on one hand the voice of the average person has never counted for more and has the ability to change things; sharply contrasted with the idea that there are powerful people and governments out there, and that if they can take out an entire country, they don’t even work up a sweat when contemplating me.

“The new doctrine was not one of pre-emptive war, which arguably falls within some stretched interpretation of the UN Charter, but rather doctrine that doesn’t begin to have any grounds in international law, namely, preventative war. That is, the United States will rule the world by force, and if there is any challenge to its domination-whether it is perceived in the distance, invented, imagined, or whatever-then the United States will have the right to destroy that challenge before it becomes a threat. That’s preventative war, not pre-emptive war.”

Fat Cats march on in 2007

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on January 5, 2007
in Connection Economy, Ethics, Future Trends, Leadership and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

The last few years have seen obscene payments made to CEOs. The gap between what the top managers earn and what labourers in their factories earn has never been as wide as it is today (unless you go back to Feudal landlord days). Of course, if these top managers with all the pressures on them were delivering serious financial returns to shareholders on a consistent basis and developing not only short-term, but also long-term capacity and sustainable comeptitive advantage, then they deserve to be rewarded appropriately.

But the trend has been to pay bonuses and perks completely unrelated to performance. Even worse, is when badly performing CEOs leave a company (by choice, or pushed) they are often paid unbelievable severance packages, rather than simply being sent packing in disgrace!

Bob NardelliThere has been great hope that those fat cat days were a thing of the past, and that the backlash of shareholders would stop this trend. But 2007 has started with the departure of Home Depot’s Bob Nardelli (he had previously been on the GE shortlist to replace Jack Welch, and left when Immelt was appointed to that post). For the last 6 years, he has consistently been near the top of the list of “most overpaid CEOs”. This is particularly true because Home Depot has gone nowhere under his leadership. Under the terms of his contract, his severance package is worth $210m. Not too bad, considering that the share price on the day before his departure (3 January) was slightly less than it was when he took the job in 2000.

This is unbelievable, indefensible and immoral. Simple as that!

Luckily, it appears as if shareholder activism is working, and this hopefully will be one of the last of these sorts of fat cat payouts.

The Economist sums it up this way:

Continue reading ‘Fat Cats march on in 2007′

MILLENNIALS PLAN TO REWARD OR PUNISH COMPANIES

Published
by
Dean van Leeuwen
on October 27, 2006
in Environmental Issues, Ethics, Millennial generation and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 0 Comments

Company KidsIf the results of a recent study are true, then Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) needs to become a priority for companies and fast. A research study by the strategic planning and consumer insights division of AMP Agency shows that 61% of Millennials born between 1971 and 2001 feel personally responsible for making a difference in the world.
The results are eye-opening and socially and environmentally responsible businesses are positioned to reap rewards:

  • 83% will trust a company more if it is socially/environmentally responsible.
  • 74% are more likely to pay attention to a company’s marketing when they see that the company has a deep commitment to a cause.
  • 89% are likely or very likely to switch from one brand to another (price and quality being equal) if the second brand is associated with a good cause.
  • 79% want to work for a company that cares about how it impacts and contributes to society.
  • 64% say their company’s social/environmental activities make them feel loyal to that company.
  • 56% would refuse to work for an irresponsible corporation

The pendulum appears to be swinging back, in the 80’s CSR was big and many companies leveraged this from a marketing perspective. Nedbank’s affinity and green products come to mind. But in the last decade CSR took a back seat to downsizing, rightsizing, operational efficiencies and bottom line profits.
Continue reading ‘MILLENNIALS PLAN TO REWARD OR PUNISH COMPANIES’

Larson not laughing

Published
by
Graeme Codrington
on October 10, 2006
in Ethics, Media tidbits, Ripping and burning - Digital entertainment and The Quick and the Dead - case studies
. 10 Comments

Gary Larson, creator and cartoonist of The Far Side © recently sent me an email. Now, under normal circumstances, I would have been ecstatically thrilled at this. The man is one of my heroes, and his self-imposed retirement from drawing Far Side cartoons a few years ago left my world that little bit emptier. I’ll be honest and say that I am still kept up at night trying to figure out a few of his cartoons I still don’t get. Before I die, I’ll work them out. But this obsession is testament to his skill! I have all his books, and most of the reprints and best of’s as well. I have had numerous desk calendars, bought a veritable pile of Far Side greeting cards, and may have even had Far Side branded underpants at some stage…

My point - I not only am a fan, I have also contributed to what I assume is a fairly wealthy man’s fortune.

So, it surprised me to receive a letter from him. Or, more precisely, from his lawyer (see the letter below). A website I own hosts a number of talks that can be used in youth groups. The site hasn’t been updated in about 7 years. One of the talks was about how to use Gary Larson’s cartoons to teach young people about God. It was a fun talk, and it included some examples of his cartoons. It was written by a friend of mine.

Now, Gary Larson, in a nice enough way, has asked us to remove the page. What I don’t get is his logic. His argument is all about his emotional attachment to his cartoons, his desire to exercise control over their usage and the fact that they are “his children”. Sure. But what about the 20 Larson books I have in my library? Why isn’t he concerned about them? I’ll be honest and say I don’t think I’ve dusted them in over a year, and one or two may have torn pages. Does that make him sad?

Why can’t he just be honest and say, “Hey punk, if you didn’t pay for the pictures, you can’t use them”. I did actually pay for them - the pics on the site were all scanned from legal copies of his books that I own.

Anyway, you read his letter, and let me know if I am being unreasonable to be just a little bit disappointed. If he had said, “Go to PayPal and make a donation”, I would have done that immediately. But I must say there is a slightly bitter taste in my mouth. But maybe I am just too much of an Internet idealist that believes there comes a time when what you’ve put “out there” just has to be trusted to the universe. As an author and presenter myself, I accept that people use my work, and I don’t pursue the copyright I own and am entitled to. Is that just me? I’d like your opinion.
Continue reading ‘Larson not laughing’